Today we are going to take a look at the primary reason why there is no "justice" in any democratic or pseudo–democratic or quasi–democratic system. The answer may surprise you.

OUR SYSTEM

Before we begin lets recall that in an Absolute Austro–Libertarian system the only purpose of "justice" is to bring things back to the way they were. Our justice system does not try to re–educate, punish or prevent people from infringing our property. Not to act against somebody else's property without a voluntary contract is strictly a personal decision. Most people will make the correct one but some will not. For the latter, Master Contract financial compensation rules apply. That's it. Short and sweet.

THEIR SYSTEM

In a democratic system however, there are all kinds of "views" and "rules" and "regulations" and "due processes" and "checks" and "balances" and on, and on, and on without end. As compensation in this system is seldom its primary goal (e.g. for the so–called "criminal" Justice system), the system itself is not financially sustainable or viable. The entire criminal justice system is a lose–lose proposition. We, the people, pay through official robbery (i.e. taxation) for the so–called "privilege" to persecute, prosecute, incarcerate, house, feed, train, provide health care and psychological well–being for all of those who infringed our property. We, the people, pay twice; once when infringed and once for the judicial system.

Something similar happens with the so–called "civil" justice system. More "rules" and "regulations" make this system inherently complicated and expensive. Furthermore, this judicial system also fully depends on taxes; it is financially un–sustainable. Although it is true that in this system people pays for lawyers, in most countries the judicial system itself is paid–for through taxes. The ridiculous excuse is that in so doing it prevents biases. In this system we only have two options:

Either we pay very expensive fees for expensive lawyers to initiate expensive proceedings or,

If we are lucky and available in our jurisdiction, we can go through a Small Claims court and do–it–ourselves wasting gigantic amounts of time while probably being at a judicial disadvantage when confronting companies.

In other words, if we attempt to seek "justice" in the current system, we lose. Most of the time we either lack the funds to pursue a civil case or pay through taxes to pursue a criminal case. Whatever we do, we lose.

JUDICIAL ECONOMY

This term was developed in USA but its processes are used in almost all countries. The concept is simple: given the fact that the Justice System operates on a budget, any and all things that minimize expenditures will be implemented. It seems to makes sense.

Let's rephrase this; it only seems to make sense. To understand why we need to look at short–cut and budgetary processes that Judicial Economy develops:

Prosecutors routinely accept "deals" for reduced sentences

Judges routinely rush trials through

Legislators routinely reduce or curtail judicial reviews and appeals

Legislators routinely increase penalties

Defense attorneys (particularly public ones) are routinely overworked

Police and other so–called "enforcement agencies" routinely dismiss, ignore or spend sub–optimum amounts of time investigating

Guilty people routinely walk free

Innocent people are routinely incarcerated or punished

Taxes are routinely increased to provide for more jails and prisons

The list is endless. The bottom line is that justice is not served by this initiative. Quite the opposite. In this quixotic and schizoidal system, a regular person receives neither justice nor compensation. Actually, a regular person is being further robbed and insulted and injured through taxation and bureaucracy.

Judicial Economy tries to be the equivalent of the fast–food industry and, not surprisingly, it obtains the same result: palatable political policies and harmful justice menus.

THE BOTTOM LINE

Theoretically speaking, given sufficient funds, a sufficient number of "enforcement agencies" and "judicial systems" can be set–up to deal with any offense (civil or criminal). The problem is that no country ever has "sufficient funds" simply because politicians spend those funds in anything that will buy them votes. Sadly, law and order seem to be inefficient vote buyers. Therefore, enforcement and judicial system are permanently under–funded. This is a fact.

The bottom line is the bottom line. There simply isn't enough money to go around supporting effective and efficient enforcement and judicial systems.

Therefore, the primary reason why in a democratic system there is no justice is money (or lack of thereof to be precise).

The solution is again money, but not in the way most people would think.

PAYING DUES

Diving deeply into the problem, it becomes clear that the issue is not insufficient taxation; the issue is that neither the enforcement nor the judicial systems are financially sustainable. This is so because infringers do not pay their debts. Should people that infringe on us civilly or criminally pay real damages as well as the real financial value of enforcement and judicial activities, both systems would be financially viable.

Judicial Economy is simply a byproduct of this lack of financial in–viability. In the end, is this financial in–viability that robs us from "justice" in whichever manner you may understand it.

It is clear that for as long as infringers do not pay their real dues, there is no solution to this problem.

OUR SYSTEM

Justice In The Absolute Austro Libertarian System is a compensatory affair. As such, it is a financial affair. Financial viability is built into the system. In our system, enforcement and mediation are self–sustainable and hence financially viable. An infringer will end–up paying for all the costs involved in their infringement, including all enforcement and mediation expenses. In our system, it is impossible not to have compensatory justice for lack of enforcement or mediation. In our system, there are no short–cuts built into the system.

Furthermore, as the caught infringer always pays, there is a gigantic financial incentive for private, enterprising people to go after infringers. There is no bureaucratic spoor nor delay.

Justice becomes yet another product managed by the free market. As a free market always adjusts to market demands, it will provide the adequate supply of "justice". This means that when the infringement level is low, the amount of enforcers and mediators will be low; when the opposite circumstances prevail, the number of enforcer and mediators will rise. In other words and in current terms, there will never be a circumstance where there is insufficient "Police" or clogged "Tribunals". These elements will always be present in the correct amount that the free market requires. You will never be "out of justice" in a free market.

Furthermore, as enforcers and mediators are paid from infringer's properties, many will operate on a contingency basis, which means that they will be mostly free to people. No taxation necessary.

Lastly, as enforcement and mediation is a financially–oriented business, it will assign resources (i.e. generate expenditures) in direct proportion to the infringement. A pick–pocketing offense will automatically draw a small effort; a murder infringement will draw a large response. Presto! A self–regulating system.

SUMMARY

Judicial Economy is simply a by–product from the financial in–viability of the enforcement and judiciary systems. This problem has no solution for as long as governments exist since governments need to control the laws to prevent their own illegitimacy to surface. The only solution is to remove governments altogether… which is a redundantly redundant conclusion at which we arrive quite often. Get the government out of a problem and the problem solves itself.

This is your choice now. Support the current in–justice system and pay for it or demand a just system and be paid. You have a decision to make.

Note: please see the Glossary if you are unfamiliar with certain words.